From: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
Subject: [PATCHv2 1/2] gdb: Remove unneeded parameter from set_breakpoint_location_function
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 18:03:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4b2521dc5cecc0c83728219638aab3fc46133153.1562003938.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1562003938.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
In-Reply-To: <cover.1562003938.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
The explicit_loc parameter in set_breakpoint_location_function is not
useful. This parameter is set from two possible fields of the
symtab_and_line used to create the breakpoint; the explicit_pc field,
and the explicit_line field.
First, the explicit_line field, this is not currently set for any
breakpoint command, so will never be true.
Next, the explicit_pc field. This can be true but will never be true
at the same time that the sal->msymbol field is also true - the
sal->msymbol is only ever set in linespec.c:minsym_found, which
doesn't allow for explicitly setting the pc.
The result of this is that if we are setting a breakpoint on an
msymbol that could turn out to be an ifunc, then we will not also have
either an explicit_pc or an explicit_line, this check can therefore be
removed.
There should be no user visible changes after this commit.
gdb/ChangeLog:
* breakpoint.c (set_breakpoint_location_function): Remove
explicit_loc parameter.
(momentary_breakpoint_from_master): Update call to
set_breakpoint_location_function.
(add_location_to_breakpoint): Likewise.
---
gdb/ChangeLog | 8 ++++++++
gdb/breakpoint.c | 14 +++++---------
2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/breakpoint.c b/gdb/breakpoint.c
index 8422db8b571..9baef38a3de 100644
--- a/gdb/breakpoint.c
+++ b/gdb/breakpoint.c
@@ -7096,12 +7096,10 @@ set_raw_breakpoint_without_location (struct gdbarch *gdbarch,
return add_to_breakpoint_chain (std::move (b));
}
-/* Initialize loc->function_name. EXPLICIT_LOC says no indirect function
- resolutions should be made as the user specified the location explicitly
- enough. */
+/* Initialize loc->function_name. */
static void
-set_breakpoint_location_function (struct bp_location *loc, int explicit_loc)
+set_breakpoint_location_function (struct bp_location *loc)
{
gdb_assert (loc->owner != NULL);
@@ -7113,8 +7111,7 @@ set_breakpoint_location_function (struct bp_location *loc, int explicit_loc)
if (loc->msymbol != NULL
&& (MSYMBOL_TYPE (loc->msymbol) == mst_text_gnu_ifunc
- || MSYMBOL_TYPE (loc->msymbol) == mst_data_gnu_ifunc)
- && !explicit_loc)
+ || MSYMBOL_TYPE (loc->msymbol) == mst_data_gnu_ifunc))
{
struct breakpoint *b = loc->owner;
@@ -8482,7 +8479,7 @@ momentary_breakpoint_from_master (struct breakpoint *orig,
copy = set_raw_breakpoint_without_location (orig->gdbarch, type, ops);
copy->loc = allocate_bp_location (copy);
- set_breakpoint_location_function (copy->loc, 1);
+ set_breakpoint_location_function (copy->loc);
copy->loc->gdbarch = orig->loc->gdbarch;
copy->loc->requested_address = orig->loc->requested_address;
@@ -8587,8 +8584,7 @@ add_location_to_breakpoint (struct breakpoint *b,
loc->msymbol = sal->msymbol;
loc->objfile = sal->objfile;
- set_breakpoint_location_function (loc,
- sal->explicit_pc || sal->explicit_line);
+ set_breakpoint_location_function (loc);
/* While by definition, permanent breakpoints are already present in the
code, we don't mark the location as inserted. Normally one would expect
--
2.14.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-01 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-12 12:34 [PATCH] gdb: Don't skip prologue for explicit line breakpoints in assembler Andrew Burgess
2019-06-20 1:11 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-06-20 20:58 ` Andrew Burgess
2019-06-20 23:23 ` Andrew Burgess
2019-06-21 3:20 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-06-21 13:43 ` Pedro Alves
2019-06-22 11:06 ` Andrew Burgess
2019-06-22 11:23 ` Andrew Burgess
2019-06-24 19:16 ` Pedro Alves
2019-06-24 19:54 ` [PROTOTYPE] Make "info breakpoints" show breakpoint's specs (Re: [PATCH] gdb: Don't skip prologue for explicit line breakpoints in assembler) Pedro Alves
2019-07-03 22:37 ` Pedro Alves
2019-06-24 19:16 ` [PATCH] gdb: Don't skip prologue for explicit line breakpoints in assembler Pedro Alves
2019-07-01 17:12 ` Andrew Burgess
2019-07-01 18:03 ` Andrew Burgess [this message]
2019-07-03 22:13 ` [PATCHv2 1/2] gdb: Remove unneeded parameter from set_breakpoint_location_function Pedro Alves
2019-07-01 18:03 ` [PATCHv2 0/2] Changes for explicit_line tracking, and prologue skipping Andrew Burgess
2019-07-01 18:03 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] gdb: Don't skip prologue for explicit line breakpoints in assembler Andrew Burgess
2019-07-03 22:13 ` Pedro Alves
2019-07-01 18:21 ` [PATCH] " Pedro Alves
2019-07-02 8:28 ` Andrew Burgess
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4b2521dc5cecc0c83728219638aab3fc46133153.1562003938.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com \
--to=andrew.burgess@embecosm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox